Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> And no, I can do this using plain old arch, and I don't really
> have to change my SCM.
> But not all Debian maintainers are using git;
>> Version control systems that have content-addressable filesystems
>> (essentially, git and Monotone) are inherently efficient to
>> distribute; [...]
> Which is great, but I fear it will not fly as a the one and
> only
Ok, I apologise for leaving my note to this effect to the end of my
e-mail. But let me repeat.
I'm not asking that you change the SCM that you use.
I'll say it again, this time for the other subscribers.
I'm NOT asking that you change the SCM that you use or the way that you
work.
All I'm talking about is using git as a replacement for the *source
archive* format. How the files are archived and distributed. There are
compelling reasons to want to do this; not least getting around the fact
that shipping patch series in .diff.gz doesn't handle cases like
integration branches without adding a new patch format (which is also
something I think is probably useful, and a complementary approach).
Thanks for the rest of your e-mail, which contains constructive feedback
which I will now digest and respond to!
Cheers,
Sam.